U2.Com 2014 Membership Package.

[Brad]

I don't recall why exactly, but I am paid up a year ahead on my U2.com subscription. This has never been a problem in the past, but when I went to resubscribe yesterday I got the message, "Your account is expiring in 2015-12-02. You cannot renew at this time." I ended up creating a new account with a separate email address so I could order the vinyl set.

Very happy with the choice of an early club show. Really fits with the themes of Songs of Innocence and their focus for the past couple of years. I would love a lossless download as well, but vinyl is easy enough to rip.

[God, Part II]

Worst renewal gift(s) ever. And this love affair with vinyl must come to a merciful end, please. Very, very disappointed with this news.

[MartinTexas]

Worst renewal gift(s) ever. And this love affair with vinyl must come to a merciful end, please. Very, very disappointed with this news.

U2 Go Home (simply DVD rip), and North Side Story (without any music!) are worse. But this one is also bad idea.

Vinyl in 21-st century? I'm not an antiquarian! Totally useless thing for me
Why not a CD? CDs are playable everywhere: from PCs to cars. But vinyl?
Looks like I'll have to register on e-bay soon…

   I think the same - why vinyl??? Why not duoble or single CD added to this? It's very sad and annoying with that "vinyls comeback". Last year book was not good enough. It would be nice if they add a single CD with some Boy Tour concert - CD + book would be grat. But vinyl + book as a separate gifts are terible choice. 


Thay called it "live set digitally remastered" - so why realeased on analog vinyl?  It's missunderstood! 

I second the request---Lossless download option--PLEASE! Most of us don't have turntables, but still want the real deal. Unless you have an audiophile rig and know that you're doing, that DL is going to sound better, anyway.

Lossless download could save a little this gift. But I don't know what u2.com stuuf want to do? The could just give us a lossy mp3s..... 

[miryclay]

Vinyl in 21-st century? I'm not an antiquarian! Totally useless thing for me
Why not a CD? CDs are playable everywhere: from PCs to cars. But vinyl?
Looks like I'll have to register on e-bay soon…

I don't understand the reluctance to vinyl. It is all over the place and the intention of this record is to have the full experience of the early days. It is going to sound great and I welcome it. If you don't have a player I suggest one that is only about $100 and has a USB so you can stay connected to your PC. This gift is good. I hope it is the Marquee gig.   

[God, Part II]

I don't understand the reluctance to vinyl. It is all over the place and the intention of this record is to have the full experience of the early days.

Because a) though I keep hearing vinyl aficionados claim otherwise, I've never heard vinyl playback that doesn't suffer from some degree of hiss, crackles and pops, b) even if I could manage to invest in a system capable of eradicating all such audio "noise", vinyl is a degradable format--every time you play it, its fidelity to the original recording (heck, even that vinyl's first playback) becomes lesser and lesser, and c) the alleged "warmer" sound of vinyl is simply a placebo effect--and there is even some strange filtering and processing of the original audio that has to be applied to vinyl for bass to play without knocking the needle out of the groove! Even with this engineering trickery, vinyl bass often can't sink as low as a CD's can!

I utterly despise the resurgence of vinyl's popularity; it represents a massive leap backwards in technology and arguably as much of an affront to fidelity to the original master recording as mp3s. When new releases are made available exclusively in vinyl format (and this is twice now that U2 has done that), it really sends me into a lather.

[Aaron]

I utterly despise the resurgence of vinyl's popularity; it represents a massive leap backwards in technology and arguably as much of an affront to fidelity to the original master recording as mp3s. When new releases are made available exclusively in vinyl format (and this is twice now that U2 has done that), it really sends me into a lather.

Sadly, with the state of the music business, I think vinyl will be the last physical release format standing soon.  Yes albums are still being released on CD, but how many are buying?  Sales are struggling.  And I see this moving to other parts of the industry.  Why give our fans something that can be ripped and on the internet before most people even have it in the mailbox?  But there's still a need to offer something physical it seems, instead of a download...vinyl still seems to hold some interest in a digital world. I'm happy to have something physical, rather than just a download as a gift...I'd prefer a CD, yes, but if the option becomes vinyl or download, I'll take the vinyl option every time.

[God, Part II]

Sadly, with the state of the music business, I think vinyl will be the last physical release format standing soon.  Yes albums are still being released on CD, but how many are buying?  Sales are struggling.  And I see this moving to other parts of the industry.  Why give our fans something that can be ripped and on the internet before most people even have it in the mailbox?  But there's still a need to offer something physical it seems, instead of a download...vinyl still seems to hold some interest in a digital world. I'm happy to have something physical, rather than just a download as a gift...I'd prefer a CD, yes, but if the option becomes vinyl or download, I'll take the vinyl option every time.

If it comes down to such a choice, I'll go download, if it lossless. If it ever gets down to a choice between only vinyl and lossy downloads, that'll likely spell the utter end of my music collecting days.

[MartinTexas]

Because a) though I keep hearing vinyl aficionados claim otherwise, I've never heard vinyl playback that doesn't suffer from some degree of hiss, crackles and pops, b) even if I could manage to invest in a system capable of eradicating all such audio "noise", vinyl is a degradable format--every time you play it, its fidelity to the original recording (heck, even that vinyl's first playback) becomes lesser and lesser, and c) the alleged "warmer" sound of vinyl is simply a placebo effect--and there is even some strange filtering and processing of the original audio that has to be applied to vinyl for bass to play without knocking the needle out of the groove! Even with this engineering trickery, vinyl bass often can't sink as low as a CD's can!

I utterly despise the resurgence of vinyl's popularity; it represents a massive leap backwards in technology and arguably as much of an affront to fidelity to the original master recording as mp3s. When new releases are made available exclusively in vinyl format (and this is twice now that U2 has done that), it really sends me into a lather.

101% agreement!    Till today the best versions of songs from WAIE EP, Soon single & Breathe (Mandela Version) are (sadly!) mp3s streaming at/downloaded from u2.com  None of the vinyl rips are close to this. Faster, slower, with "clicks", etc.

If it comes down to such a choice, I'll go download, if it lossless. If it ever gets down to a choice between only vinyl and lossy downloads, that'll likely spell the utter end of my music collecting days.

Unfortunately it becomes a "fashion". We live in Blu-Ray & HD era with choice between lossy download or alalogue vinyl. 

Why u2.com doesnt't get subscribers choice - to get vinyl or CD? Something simmilar to Artificiall Horizon. "OK. Let's do a vinyl edition, but not as exclusive edition".

[enaul]

Last time i ordered a 12 inch vinyl, the record company added a promo CD for customers who bought the LP directly from their web site. This cd was not announced and i found it in the mailer 3 weeks after receiving the LP

http://www.discogs.com/Tuxedomoon-Pink-Narcissus/release/5663848

Perhaps we can ask U2 to do the same for this vinyl release.

[miryclay]

Some artists I have bought records from include the CD booklet with linear notes but with no CD. A good idea.

[miryclay]

I simply loved it! I had such low expectations for this one, so this is really a welcome surprise.

Among the possibilities, I would love it to be the full recording from Marquee, London (September 22, 1980).

They have already released two tracks from the gig -- Boy-Girl [IWF single] and 11 O'Clock [Boy Remaster] -- so a SDB recording definitely exists. It's a UK club gig around-ish Boy Release Date and has never been bootlegged -- at least that I know of.

So, this would be perfect. Now my bar is set high on this one.

That's one of those shows where the setlist remains in the "unknown" category despite there being a recording of it in the archives somewhere.  I'd love to see a full show with some rare pieces intact - the whole show.  No edits.  Just release it with a minimum of sonic cleanup.  Even better if it fills in some mystery such as an unknown set list.  Would be nice if they actually did revisit a few more in coming years as well.  I know i'd pay to download a couple of early shows. 

Ever since this album has been launched I've been wondering if the band is looking back at these older songs and older tours.  I wouldn't be surprised if we see some songs from "Boy" creep into the setlist this time around as fixtures on a tour.  Which is fine by me as "Boy" is still a favorite and there's some fine songs in there that I wouldn't mind hearing a few more times.

This show would be relevant to this post for two reasons. No overdubs, no edits and also recorded at the Marquee. Sounds great BTW.
http://www.discogs.com/Cult-Live-Cult-Marquee-London-MCMXCI-Part-Two/release/747376

[morgan1098]

If anything, U2 is late to the party with this whole "return to vinyl" thing. I almost laughed when I saw the line in the announcement about "celebrating the return of vinyl." Uh, that might have been an appropriate message in 2009, but whatever.

Like most others here, I'd definitely prefer a CD. But the writing is on the wall, and I am going to have to be happy with my digital download and the glorious vinyl artwork (assuming the artwork IS glorious). I will never actually play the vinyl, though. 

In terms of actual value, the vinyl set is technically worth more for your $40 or $50. It costs more to manufacture a double vinyl set than it does a CD. That might not always be the case as CD manufacturing continues to slow and more vinyl manufacturing comes online, but for the moment it would be far cheaper to manufacture CDs. The fan club could see a much bigger profit margin that way. If Paul McGuinness was still at the helm I bet we'd get a CD!

[jw]

I'm glad to see I'm not alone in not really treasuring vinyl.  They're interesting, but not at all practical.  I collect vinyl only when it has exclusive songs.  That seems to happen a fair amount these days which is really annoying.  Why make music exclusive to a format that the majority do not have the means to play?

[dagobah]

I will not drive from the Wyoming/Colorado area to Phoenix to see U2 in concert in 2015.  So . . . . . I will hope U2 comes to Denver or Salt Lake City in 2016.  Considering my concert situation, a pre-sale code means nothing to me right now.  And the subscription gift of the Double 10-inch Vinyl live album also means nothing to me.  My previous subscription ran out over 1 year ago so I have to start a new one.  I already have live versions of old U2 songs from buying the iTunes U2 digital box set and from buying other normal U2 releases.

The questions are:
1.  For the live tracks, how different could they be from the live tracks I already have from that era?

2.  Is one new track, Father Is An Elephant, a track I have never heard . . . . . . worth paying $50 for?  I have never heard of this track.  I don't know if I will like it.

3.  Shouldn't I just wait until Summer 2015 . . . . . and read (on this forum and on the @U2 forum) people's opinions about the live tracks?  Couldn't I just decide, at that point, to pay $50 for a new U2.com subscription?  If I waited long enough in 2015, wouldn't I still be eligible for a pre-sale code for a 2016 Denver concert (if a Denver concert gets scheduled)?

4.  Am I the only person (at the Wanderer Forum) who has these types of questions?

[Aaron]

I will not drive from the Wyoming/Colorado area to Phoenix to see U2 in concert in 2015.  So . . . . . I will hope U2 comes to Denver or Salt Lake City in 2016.  Considering my concert situation, a pre-sale code means nothing to me right now.  And the subscription gift of the Double 10-inch Vinyl live album also means nothing to me.  My previous subscription ran out over 1 year ago so I have to start a new one.  I already have live versions of old U2 songs from buying the iTunes U2 digital box set and from buying other normal U2 releases.

The questions are:
1.  For the live tracks, how different could they be from the live tracks I already have from that era?

2.  Is one new track, Father Is An Elephant, a track I have never heard . . . . . . worth paying $50 for?  I have never heard of this track.  I don't know if I will like it.

3.  Shouldn't I just wait until Summer 2015 . . . . . and read (on this forum and on the @U2 forum) people's opinions about the live tracks?  Couldn't I just decide, at that point, to pay $50 for a new U2.com subscription?  If I waited long enough in 2015, wouldn't I still be eligible for a pre-sale code for a 2016 Denver concert (if a Denver concert gets scheduled)?

4.  Am I the only person (at the Wanderer Forum) who has these types of questions?

You will be able to subscribe at any time up until late November 2015 and still receive the double vinyl if you do want it.  So yes, you can wait, and subscribe later, once you know what the contents are.

However, if your subscription lapses, you will have to pay $50 for the subscription, and you may be considered a new subscriber.  In the recent ticket sales, old members are given an extra day earlier to buy tickets, over other newer subscribers.  That being said, many friends were considered new subscribers, and none had any issues getting the tickets they wanted in the presale.  With the 2016 shows likely being bigger shows, that will make it easier to get tickets again.  So I'm not sure it's worth it.  But I have to point it out as it's the reason many keep their subscriptions active.

In the current round of presales, anyone who subscribed as a new subscriber before September 9th, 2014 were considered a long time member and let into the presales early.  Those subscribing after September 9th as a new subscriber could not enter the presales until the second day.

"Father is an Elephant" has not been announced to be on the set.  It may not be.  The full track listing has not been announced.
There are few clear recordings of this song.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9_YOhZ3GdI is a really poor recording of it if you want to get a sense of what type of song it might be.  But I will warn you the quality is horrible there.  They may release a show from 1980 where it was not even played. 

My suggestion, is look at when your subscription is ending.  If you are concerned about tickets and getting in the early presales, consider resubscribing before it expires.  The gift contents should be announced soon which may help you decide.  If the ticket priority isn't an issue to you, then let the subscription lapse, and consider buying it in the fall when the new gift is announced or tickets for 2016 go on sale.

Aaron